Bible, evolution NOT perfectly compatible, despite Jesuit apologetics

[Jayhawker Soule]

Bible, evolution are perfectly compatible, says Jesuit magazine

ROME (CNS) -- Properly understood, the Bible and evolutionary science are perfectly compatible, said an influential Jesuit magazine.

To use religious arguments against evolution shows ignorance of the nature of the Bible, the magazine, La Civilta Cattolica, said in its Nov. 19 issue.

On the other hand, science cannot pretend to exclude a divine role behind the creation of the world and man, it said.

- see Catholic News Service

This is absolute nonsense:

• The only way to make the bible and evolution compatible is to bastardize evolution.
• Science excludes untestable speculation: there is no demonstrable "divine role behind the creation of the world and man"

The article is rubbish.

 

[spacemonkey]

This is absolute nonsense:

• The only way to make the bible and evolution compatible is to bastardize evolution.
• Science excludes untestable speculation: there is no demonstrable "divine role behind the creation of the world and man"

The article is rubbish.

Perhabs its not so much a bastardization of evolution as it is an admission by the Catholic Church that the Genesis might not be the "literal" story of the creation, but rather a metaphor.

 

[soma]

God is in evolution and so evolution is a process in God

The oneness of everything in pure consciousness manifest itself into many in matter and then returns back again to the unity of pure consciousness to complete the cycle of evolution. The scientists and the Christian mystics are both correct in their statements about evolution, but differ only in the way they talk about their different stages. Instead of being opponents in trying to popularize their different hypothesis, they complement each other, each faction making a contribution to the whole. The site below under evolution has a diagram that incorporates each faction's thoughts into a more complete synthesis where they are both correct.

http://thinkunity.com

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

God is in evolution and so evolution is a process in God

Pure cognitively meaningless babble. It makes no more sense to speak of God in evolution than to speak of Pixie Dust in thermodynamics.

 

[ChrisP]

Pure cognitively meaningless babble. It makes no more sense to speak of God in evolution than to speak of Pixie Dust in thermodynamics.

An interesting thought Deut.....








What effect would Pixie dust have on thermodynamics?

Don't waste your time guys, he starts these threads so he can tell us all how imaginary God is.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Perhabs its not so much a bastardization of evolution as ... a metaphor.

It is a very defective metaphor indeed that posits the creation/evolution of bees before the creation/evolution of flowers. In fact, Genesis looks remarkable like primitive myth reflecting West Semitic roots - perhaps because it's primitive myth reflecting West Semitic roots.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

What effect would Pixie dust have on thermodynamics?

Cause heat engines to cough ....

 

[Sunstone]

What effect would Pixie dust have on thermodynamics?

None.

Don't waste your time guys, he starts these threads so he can tell us all how imaginary God is.

It's far from being a waste of time to spend some time learning what you can learn from Deut.

 

[ChrisP]

Cause heat engines to cough ....

OMG was that a joke :biglaugh: YAY!!! finally

 

[ChrisP]

None.


It's far from being a waste of time to spend some time learning what you can learn from Deut.

Good advice, but Deuts fields of Knowledge so far revealed to me pretty much mirror my own.

That and he's just too darn serious.

 

[Ormiston]

Don't waste your time guys, he starts these threads so he can tell us all how imaginary God is.

Can god be MORE imaginary than it already is?? Huh. I just thought it was imaginary.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Don't waste your time guys, he starts these threads so he can tell us all how imaginary God is.

Actually, I started the thread in response to the Bible, evolution perfectly compatible thread created by Victor in the Roman Catholic forum, i.e., placed so as to be relatively insulated from criticism.

... Deuts fields of Knowledge so far revealed to me pretty much mirror my own.

That's insulting.

 

[Sunstone]

Deut, it seems to me that the Jesuit apologetics, if taken to an extreme, render the notion of God superfluous. Is that your take on it, or do you see something else here?

 

[joeboonda]

Well I agree with Deut. either you believe in evolution or you believe in creation ( I mean in the Bible), you cannot make them both work, because the Bible says by Adam sin passed to all men in Romans 5. Either accept the Bible or accept evolution, but don't contradict either one, it doesnt work.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

One can speak in the vernacular of how a plant "evolves" from a seed.
One can speak scientifically of how a human "evolves" from prokaryotes.

The Jesuit apologetics seek to substitute the former for the latter and then infer the possibility of a God-inspired teleological evolution. It's sloppy semantic slight-of-hand. Frankly, I would have expected better from them.

 

[soma]

The Christian theologians have been describing the first phase of evolution, which is God creating matter, or the infinite manifesting itself as the finite. On the other hand, the scientists have been describing the second phase of evolution, which is the evolution of matter back to the infinite, all encompassing God. Therefore, they are both describing evolution, just different phases.

 

[Sunstone]

The Christian theologians have been describing the first phase of evolution, which is God creating matter, or the infinite manifesting itself as the finite. On the other hand, the scientists have been describing the second phase of evolution, which is the evolution of matter back to the infinite, all encompassing God. Therefore, they are both describing evolution, just different phases.

This is fascinating. But perhaps it wouldn't be so fascinating if it actually made sense.

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Soma,

I disagree with your premise that science and religion are simply describing different phases of the same process, but just in case you are right, explain to me how over 90% of the species to ever inhabit this planet, including dinosaurs such as T-Rex and Brontosaurus have managed to become extinct and become fossils and oil in the last 5,765 years?

Deut. again is dead on.

Either you buy into the bible and beleive the world is 5,765 years old, or you beleive in the VAST amount of physical recordable scientific evidence which indicates that the world is 4.5 billion years old and that life on the planet is where it is by nature of the evolutionary process. Hard to mix and match the two without either changing the Bible story or changing how evolution works.

B.

 

[michel]

This is fascinating. But perhaps it wouldn't be so fascinating if it actually made sense.

Hehe, I agree.

The Christian theologians have been describing the first phase of evolution, which is God creating matter, or the infinite manifesting itself as the finite. On the other hand, the scientists have been describing the second phase of evolution, which is the evolution of matter back to the infinite, all encompassing God. Therefore, they are both describing evolution, just different phases.

Soma, you are trying to mix scientific 'processes' with total unknowns. You are trying to inject some sort of God-driven physics (which you cannot define, is only conjecture, and which is untestable, and unprovable) into a parallel science which is made of laws we can comprehend, and, mostly, reproduce.

 

[Fatmop]

Hard to mix and match the two without either changing the Bible story or changing how evolution works.

Hey! Behe does a fine job of that, thank you very much.